No smokes in the car with kiddies?

The Illinois Senate gave its consideration to a measure that I’m sure was bound to infuriate a certain segment of our society – making it a ticketable offense for someone to light up a cigarette in their own automobile if, by chance, they happen to have kids in the car with them.

Personally, I find it to be a noble goal. I can remember as a kid finding it rather disgusting to be around people who smoked tobacco products. It is a large part of the reason why I never took up the habit myself.

BUT I’M NOT sure how such a ban could ever be realistically enforced unless we’re willing to give police unlimited powers to start searching our cars. And it wouldn’t shock me to learn that many of those cops are smokers themselves.

So it shouldn’t be a shock that when the bill in question, sponsored by state Sen. Ira Silverstein, D-Chicago, came up for a vote, it went down to an ignoble defeat.

A mere 8 state senators were in favor of the idea.

In my mind, I can hear the piercing whistle that some legislators used to make whenever a bill was on its way to defeat. That whistle intending to be a parody of the sound of bombs being dropped on the idea, thereby blowing it to smithereens.

SERIOUSLY, THE WAY a cop would have to enforce this would be to get up so close as to see if not only is someone smoking, but are there little children in the vehicle as well.

What it really means is that police would wind up having to pull over people based on their suspicions, and hope that they wind up catching enough people in the act of smoking-while-in-the-presence-of-children that they can get enough people to file charges against.

Considering that this likely would be a traffic offense of sorts, I doubt the fines would be sufficient enough to make all the time on the part of police officers worthwhile.

Then again, the fact that we’d have to put a certain amount of trust in police officers not to start pulling people over for whatever suspicions they have (then claim they suspected there was smoking taking place).

SHOULD IT REALLY then be a surprise that the state Senate’s black caucus was amongst the opponents?

State Sen. Kimberly Lightford, D-Maywood, made it clear the caucus didn’t trust police enough to limit their searches for smokers with children to reasonable searches. They might wind up pulling over many black motorists, claiming there was a suspicion that tobacco products were somehow being inhaled.

Now I know some people don’t want to believe that anyone could legitimately not trust law enforcement. They’re going to be the ones who will now scream how ridiculous this all is.

But it may well be a sign of how big the gap is amongst certain people in our society in terms of trusting the police.

I REMEMBER ONE now-retired suburban police chief once telling me he seriously believed that the kind of people who went into law enforcement for a living are the elite of our society.

Others are quick to see a batch of thugs using their law enforcement authority to reinforce their own personal hang-ups.

The fact that this issue could even crop up is all the more reason we ought to be thankful that this particular piece of legislation (which likely will become an annual issue for the General Assembly to contemplate) didn’t go very far.

Because what’s the next step – we make it illegal for smokers to raise children?

  -30-

Is this the Dem rebuttal to Rauner minimum wage hike ‘proposal?’

Just one day after Gov. Bruce Rauner made known his vision for an increase in Illinois’ minimum wage, the state Senate gave him the political equivalent of a certain vulgar gesture involving the middle digit.

The Senate, with a Democratic supermajority large enough to override any future gubernatorial veto, gave its approval on Thursday to a bill by state Sen. Kimberly Lightford, D-Maywood, that provides for an increase in the $8.25 an hour minimum wage that now exists in Illinois.

UNDER THE LIGHTFORD proposal, the minimum wage would increase to $9 this year, then go up another 50 cents per year each year through 2019. By the end of Rauner’s current term as governor, Illinois would have a minimum wage of $11 per hour.

That differs from the minimum wage proposal offered up by Rauner this week when he made his State of the State address. His plan would call for increases of a quarter per year through 2022 and would top off at $10 per hour.

I’m sure he’s going to argue that his rate is still significantly higher than the $7.25 minimum wage rate currently set by the federal government and that applies in surrounding states such as Indiana where local officials have taken no independent action of their own.

But for those people who are arguing that Chicago ought to have a minimum wage rate of around $13 per hour (it was about $3.50 per hour back when I was in high school and worked those kind of jobs so I could have some extra cash), Rauner’s minimum wage talk sounds like an insult!

THAT IS WHY I’m sure Democrats running the Illinois Senate were eager to pass their own idea so quickly after Rauner offered up his idea (which was an improvement from his political talk back during last year’s primary election cycle where he was completely opposed to any increase).

Rauner, a Republican whose wife supposedly has a strong Democratic voting record, used his State of the State to make many proposals and statements that were meant to make Dems squirm.

Or at the very least put them in their place and let them know a full-fledged GOPer is now in control of the executive branch of Illinois government.

So in that context, the Democratic Party response from their people in the Illinois Senate makes total sense – Dems are reminding Rauner that the executive branch is merely one part of state government. They are the legislative branch, and will have to be listened to.

THAT ULTIMATELY IS what will determine just how ugly the next four years will be for state government officials.

If Rauner tempers his Republican rhetoric on issues like “right to work” or anything meant to single out organized labor to realize he has a legitimate opposition to negotiate with, he’s going to find that people like Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, and Mayor Rahm Emanuel will be sympathetic.

They may even secretly find some of his ideas desirable (no one of sense mistakes Madigan or Emanuel for a liberal) and will appreciate Rauner’s willingness to be the “front man” for ideas that more liberal elements of the Democratic Party will abhor.

But if Rauner thinks he’s going to be the “CEO of Illinois government” who gets to bark orders at subordinates – who are then expected to blindly follow his lead and carry them out at risk of having their employment terminated – then he will find that Thursday’s state Senate action was merely the first of many.

HIS ADMINISTRATION MAY wind up setting records for the most measures it had overridden by the General Assembly!

One key to this particular issue is to keep Madigan and the Illinois House of Representatives in mind. House Democrats have not committed themselves to do anything with the minimum wage.

In fact, it was their opposition to do anything last year that prevented departing Gov. Pat Quinn from being able to claim a pay raise for minimum wage workers as his final government achievement. Thursday’s vote may be the end of public discussion on this issue until the two sides can actually reach agreement in the distant future.

Or it could turn out to be the first of many political obscene gestures the Legislature will direct at this governor if they think he’s getting “out of line” with the public’s desires.

  -30-

EXTRA: A partisan political brawl is in the works – all over a crummy $10

You have to admire Gov. Pat Quinn, in a way.

QUINN: Willing to tick people off

The man is willing to say and do things that he knows will tick people off.

HE’S ALREADY GOT the ideologues gunning for him because of his eager backing for gay marriage being legal in Illinois. Now, he’s going to have them taking his name in vain because of the minimum wage.

Illinois already has a minimum wage that is one dollar per hour higher than the national minimum – and higher than that paid to workers in neighboring Indiana.

But it’s not good enough. He used his “State of the State” address on Wednesday to say he wants to bolster it even higher – up to $10 per hour.

He would do it in increments. A slight increase each year for the next four years until that $10 level is achieved.

THAT’S STILL NOT a lot of money, if you’re honest about it.

But Quinn sees the current issue as one where people working a full 40 hours per week are making so little that they’re still at poverty level.

Which will get him support in some circles. But I’m sure the business interests will despise the notion of paying their labor any more, and they will go out of their way to encourage the idea that they will relocate to a place where work is cheaper.

Or, to be honest, to a place where the political people are willing to let their citizenry be devalued to the lower wages they permit.

PERSONALLY, I HAVE always thought companies (and people) get what they pay for. You go to a place where things are cheap, it’s usually because there isn’t anything there worth paying for.

Which is why I couldn’t help but notice the Illinois Senate Republicans using a Twitter account to immediately point out that Illinois’ minimum wage is “already significantly higher” than that of surrounding states.

Perhaps Quinn is just realistic enough to know some people are never going to support him, so he’s not going to pander to their rancid rhetoric on so many issues.

LIGHTFORD: Doing heavy lifting on issue

So what happens now?

WE’LL HAVE TO wait and see what happens in the General Assembly. State Rep. Kimberly Lightford, D-Maywood, already has a bill in the legislative process.

But thousands of bills get introduced each year. Only a few hundred actually get considered, and many less wind up getting that gubernatorial autograph that turns them into state laws.

Let’s hope that Quinn didn’t stir up so much resentment on Wednesday that he killed off the concept of a higher wage for our state’s workers.

Then again, I’m sure the ideologues are more offended at his talk about gun control measures. But that’s a debate for another day.

  -30-

EDITOR'S NOTE: For those who feel compelled to do so, the governor has made available the text of his annual address.